Open 274: Game Over!

[Fenchurch]

/confirm

[Fenchurch]

I was waiting for your conversation to reach it's natural conclusion.

Well, 28 with this game. 27 came from my wiki page, which does not yet include this game.

Did you have to go through your wiki and count before you made this post, or was the number in your head already?

And yes, I do love Hoopla.

[Fenchurch]

Also, the forum might show that I'm browsing, but that just means I have the window open in the background. I am doing work at the same time.

[Fenchurch]

Based on events so far, do you think Hoopla is scum, town, or no read?

[Fenchurch]

andrew, you voted/attempted to vote Hoopla. Do you think her actions so far are more likely to come from scum or town? Why?

In targetting Hoopla, you are implicitly defending Alduskkel. Do you feel comfortable with this?

[Fenchurch]

VOTE: Stefunny

[Fenchurch]

Seems like RVS has taken off, I'm curious as to how Fenchurch Randomed my name? Your username looks familiar, do you frequent any other forums?

How, or why? Why is the same reason Hoopla pointed out; I saw you were browsing and wanted you to post.

I don't really post on any other forums, but I'm probably not the only Fenchurch out there.

What do you think of the game so far? Who strikes you as scummy or not scummy? In particular, what is your opinion on andrew?

of course scum...
i already explained earlier.

Well then I disagree. I think pushing an empty case on someone later in the game might be scummy, but early in the game it's a valid kickstarter/hunting method, and pro-town. Although in Hoopla's case I consider it a null tell.

how am i implicitly defending alduskkel??? for all i know, its a sick role play

I find it odd that your first reaction is to suggest that they might be scum together.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: andrew94

[Fenchurch]

I didn't say your case was empty, I said it was wrong.

The 'empty' case I was referring to was Hoopla's immediately opening the game with vote/pressure on Alduskkel. I assumed that was why you were voting her, although you didn't give much of an explanation.

[Fenchurch]

early in the game it's a valid kickstarter/hunting method, and pro-town.

It was the very start of the game. It's not possible to have a strong reason for a vote; you have to improvise. Scum have been caught in the past using this method. Do you dispute this? Did you read the game that was linked to?

I think your persistence in holding on to a crap case seems forced, and therefore scummy.

[Fenchurch]

It's not from any wiki, it just makes sense, and can be demonstrated in other games. And as I already said, I'm NOT sure Hoopla is town-aligned here, I consider it a null tell as to her alignment, because she has played before and knows what she's doing. But that doesn't stop it being pro-town: putting pressure on someone at the start of the game generates information which is helpful regardless of who does it. It's certainly not scummy, which is what you are trying to make out.

I'm not asking you to back off, I'm pointing out to others why I think you're scum.

[Fenchurch]

I would like an opinion on this/andrew from everyone else please.

[Fenchurch]

Sorry if that wasn't clear, I'm want to hear everyone's current read on andrew, or if not that, about this case in general.

And I want to hear more from ConfidAnon, DMG and Stefunny.

[Fenchurch]

"pro-town" isn't equal to town.

A player can do something that benefits the town, without being town themselves.

[Fenchurch]

And a player can look pro-town, whilst being scum. That depends on the skill and experience of the player in question, which is why I give Hoopla a wide margin of error.

[Fenchurch]

[Fenchurch]

It was just my dismayed face at DMG's defeatism.

Fenchurch's case is applying a double standard. andrew94 is scummy for having a crap case, but Hoopla is not scummy for it? All cases are kind of crappy currently.

It's not a double-standard. I have different expectations of a case and a vote right at the opening of the game, to those that come after. Is that not normal?

I don't think he gave much of a case for voting Hoopla but I do feel like she terrible reasoning for her vote either, and when questioned about her vote she gave reasoning that didn't make any sense and sort of avoided questions

and then

disappeared for an unspecified amount of time. So I sort of understand where andrews vote came from.

Well, the opening of this game was kind of a replay of the marathon game that was linked to, where Hoopla gave the following explanation:

I have loose theories revolving around scum tending to be more cautious or actively seeking safe places for votes, but you don't get to unearth these motives often when games ebb and flow in the expected manner. Sometimes it pays to deviate from the norm and drag scum out of their comfort zone, because they don't have as many reference points to turn to when it's something they haven't seen.

To me this makes sense as a valid town strategy, especially for the start of the game.

i dont follow that logic. i think the act is not pro town, hoopla avoiding questions after being caught is definitely scummy

You say you think it was scummy, but you keep ignoring my point that it was the very start of the game. How do you expect anyone to come up with a solid case at that point? Can you not see the value in putting someone under pressure anyway, to see how they respond? What about in light of the above explanation that I've quoted?

[Fenchurch]

err

if so called strategy works, then there would never be a mislynch.the 'value' of putting someone under pressure could and would backfire. how would you know each individuals reaction to pressure.

What?? You could say this about any scumhunting method. No strategy is guaranteed, and what works once might not work next time, but that

doesn't stop us trying

, or how could we play?

Defeatism is an attitude that all is lost and we might as well accept defeat, I was referring to DMG's comment that the game is apparently now harder for town, which I don't see at all.

[Fenchurch]

I've already said I don't consider it a tell. So your argument now is "that player did a pro-town thing, but probably only did it so that they would look more townie", which doesn't make sense, because the more obvious explanation for someone to do something pro-town is that they are town. If we start lynching the most townie looking players then we're playing the game backwards.

And you claimed earlier that it wasn't a pro-town action, but you've yet to explain why.

[Fenchurch]

I have not the first clue of what to do. And that's Hoopla's fault.

DMG, why is that her fault? What is your experience of playing mafia before, have you played on forums, in real life?

[Fenchurch]

How would you have expected the game to begin then DMG? What do you need to happen to become less confused, what information do you want to find out? Scum aren't just going to reveal themselves to you. You are one of the players here, you have the power to influence the game, and ask the questions that you need to.

Aside from that... re-reading.

[Fenchurch]

Okay. I can kind of see where Ald and Stef are coming from, saying that Hoopla and andrew's actions are not that different; I agree that I was more willing to see underlying motivation in Hoopla's than andrew's, although I still think that a vote and/or case coming right at the start of the game, with zero information, can be judged differently to any thereafter.

I also thought that was a fairly standard opening - not just from Hoopla - but I can't point to any similar games right now so maybe I'm imagining it.

Other notes:

how am i implicitly defending alduskkel??? for all i know, its a sick role play

This still strikes me as a strange/scummy response to make.

Andrew is probably town - his attack on me impassioned and persistent, and although it has come to the wrong conclusion, I think scum would be wary to tunnel so early in the game based on a perceived action. Fenchurch has faulted andrew for holding onto a poor case, but what makes it different now, is that he has received a decent amount of pressure from Fenchurch (and others less directly), yet still hangs on tight. This means either of two things; he is town and genuinely believes he has caught something, or he is scum and believes he can get away with his vote.

I agree with this to a certain extent, but I also think that players who are scum often worry that it will be seen as suspicious to do a total U-turn, and so they will hang on to a weak case in the face of all else.

I also agree with the various observations on ConfidAnon. However...

I might be alone here but apart from this question I have not the first clue of what to do. And that's Hoopla's fault. That's also why she's scum.

I've played a lot of games and never been as confused as I am now. I can't be the problem because otherwise I would have been equally confused in tyhose games.

This is super-weak. My theory: DMG is town in his other games and scum here, and trying to cover up the fact that he doesn't know how to pretend to scumhunt when he's scum.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Da_Mafia_Godfather

[Fenchurch]

lol! suggesting that you are in scum in an uncompleted game

I took it to be just a blanket answer that no matter what we ask him about his previous experience, he can't back it up with any game links. But it could be what you say.

Honestly I haven't seen CA and Stefunny play as well as I'd expect from other games (CA especially) so I don't really agree with your premise.

So DMG has made some observations on other players, but still doesn't use it to form any reads. I swear there's a good chance it's because he's blinded by the fact he's scum himself.

My current pick for scumbuddy is CA, and I'd be happy to see either of them lynched today.

[Fenchurch]

You implied it with "this game is hopeless for town" and "I'm so confused".

Why Ald?

[Fenchurch]

Also, just noticed this from earlier:

@fenchurch, its my obvservation, you said it was weird earlier, now its scummy ? = =

When I said weird earlier, I meant I found it scummy. Weird as in, a weird thing for town to say; it didn't strike me as genuine.

[Fenchurch]

Why is it anti-town to make posts before the game has 'begun'?

And if you have reads, in what way are you/were you ever confused?

[Fenchurch]

Why is it anti-town to make posts before the game has 'begun'?

Because it has the chance to confuse people.

I still don't follow the cause-effect here. Why is posting in pregame any more confusing that waiting and posting after? People will have already received their roles; reads can be made. This is craplogic as far as I can tell.

Fenchurch/Stefunny - thoughts on CA? Do you think it would be too early to drop a hammer?

I don't know. He hasn't posted much, but what he has posted is weak/scummy. But then DMG, my other main suspect, got on his wagon, almost openly to avoid his own lynch.

CA hasn't posted since last Thursday. I thought he must've flaked, but he's posted in other games a couple of times over the weekend. Why is he avoiding ours.

@BlakAdder: please can you prod ConfidAnon, if you haven't already.

[Fenchurch]

Why? I don't think I've done anything scummy. Because I'm on the fence about CA?

[Fenchurch]

People playing to the town win condition will not post a lot in pre-game because you're wasting what is a very useful part of the game (to look back on once you've got some flips) spamming.

I don't know why you consider it spam. By that stage, all the players know their alignment. The pre-game discussion is as important and useful as in any 'RVS'.

But I think I see now what you're getting at, it's not

any

pre-game activity that confounds you, is that you found our game start in particular to be 'spammy'. I disagree, but I get it.

Hoopla - I don't have any other ideas, sorry. But I'm not scum here.

[Fenchurch]

No posts all day

Right now what I want most is to hear from CA and Stef.

CA - 4 posts, Thu 6
Stef - 6 posts, Sun 9
DMG - 16 posts, Mon 10
Ald - 23 posts, Mon 10
andrew - 23 posts, Tue 11
Fen - 25 posts, Sun 9
Hoopla - 25 posts, Mon 10

[Fenchurch]

It was triggered in post 129

I assumed it was this post, but I thought it must be the bit about CA. I was holding back in that regard; I assumed you were looking, under the assumption that CA was scum, for possible buddy reactions to the prospect of his likely lynch, eg. bussing, defending, fencesitting. If I said the absolute truth (that I was not willing to drop a hammer CA yet), that weakened any pressure on Stef to take a stance, since it was no longer such a likely lynch. It was Stef who I wanted to hear from, since she hasn't posted as much as others in the game. I was tempted to just wait until after she'd posted, but that can slow the game down, so instead I tried to be vague about my opinion. I don't know if that was a good idea or not.

Anyway...

Fenchurch is generally fairly detached, aloof even, and prefers asking questions and posting a running commetary of events, rather than get tangled in wordy debates. I've not seen her play in such a manner before, and from the looks of it, I think the change has come from her being more aggressive and going out of her way to find things as scummy.

I can't say if this is true or not - and it's slightly bizarre to hear - I'm not really aware of my play being like this. However:

* this is the first game we've played together where I've really been present from the start, where I think maybe information generation (through accusations) is more necessary than observation.
* in a small game it is often more necessary to 'get your hands dirty' than in a large game, like we were last in together.
* this isn't the first game where I've been especially aggressive; see Open 229: Vengeful.

[Fenchurch]

Oh, I've just noticed this from a couple of pages ago:

when this discussion is over, i would like to suggest to strategy

and... wanna hear my strategy.

What strategy were you going to suggest, andrew?

[Fenchurch]

Definite no in my opinion. There's also a 50% chance that the backup is useful, if they claim then they are condemned to death tonight, and we start tomorrow with a PR dead and as many confirmed townies as we would have had otherwise.

There's no benefit to getting a confirmed townie 'out of the running' if we're not already considering them for lynch anyways, and if we are, well then they can claim when the time comes.

[Fenchurch]

+if 2morrow is LYLO, claims + cc's will be untrustable.

Uncountered claims will still be trustable. Countered claims can still be judged by their claim, and their actions in the game besides.

[Fenchurch]

Okay on second thoughts it might be okay, because the 50% doc chance means if the mafia want to kill the claimed deputy, they risk 50% having their kill blocked, and might be better searching for the main PR, with the same chances as before, and then we would have a confirmed deputy tomorrow.

I'm not sure. In general I feel that D1 claim in open games is unnecessary and the risks outweigh the rewards. I'd prefer/am just as happy to play it straight with claims at the usual time. Anyone else have an opinion?

[Fenchurch]

Because if the most lynchworthy player turns out to have a claim up their sleeve, then it leaves less room for the scum to hide in. They would have to be the most town-looking players to escape their own lynch.

Still waiting for Stef's opinion on backup claiming.

[Fenchurch]

I still think that this plan overestimates the tendency and success of mafia counterclaiming, which in my experience is often easy to spot. But my experience isn't that wide, and I'm happy to go along with it if everyone else is. Stef, are you in favour then?

[Fenchurch]

BlakAdder, if you haven't found a replacement for CA, will you still be upholding the Saturday deadline?

[Fenchurch]

Okay. I was hoping to come to a unanimous verdict first, but it doesn't seem a bad move to make; Stef will just have to go along. And if it's CA then we'll know when no one else claims. I'm happy to start.

I'm not the backup power role.

By the way, no one should be claiming that they are a vanilla townie or anything else specific. Just backup or not backup. It's probably best to not specify which type of backup - I can't see an advantage to town knowing at this stage, and if mafia know then it gives them more opportunity to strategise the consequences of the backup being alive or not.

[Fenchurch]

Huh.


Also:

You defined it wrong. I defined clarify as being like

You just sort of joked around without kicking up dust (for the record, Hoopla joked around and kicked up dust)

(the bit in brackets)

I didn't understand what you meant by this originally either. I realise now you were giving it as an

example

of where Ald clarifies, but it originally looked like you meant that the bit in brackets was equivalent to a definition of what clarification means.

[Fenchurch]

@DMG: Sorry to bring it up again, but were you honestly confused by Hoopla's game opening, or just felt that it was intended to be anti-town? Does the fact that she used a similar opening in a game where she was town have any bearing on your opinion?

@Hoopla: I was going to ask this anyway, what did you mean by this quote earlier in the game?

As for Da Mafia Godfather, he is just being Da Mafia Godfather.

And you haven't commented on him much besides; what is your read on DMG in general?

@andrew: I don't totally understand what you're asking. DMG is apparently an alt of Empking. Probably to escape meta-arguments, I believe that's the usual reason well-known players create alts.

[Fenchurch]

@BlakAdder: I've just noticed ConfidAnon has been posting in some of his other games. It might be worth prodding him again, unless he specifically requested to replace out of this one.

[Fenchurch]

A town tell is totally different to a town read surely? That's not just semantics. Town tell = like a scum tell, something that pings as townie on your radar.

I think DMG makes a good call in his reads on Ald and Hoopla. I'd be happy to lynch either of them today. To a lesser extent CA; I'd prefer to see someone occupying that player slot first.

UNVOTE:

[Fenchurch]

A town tell is totally different to a town read surely? That's not just semantics. Town tell = like a scum tell, something that pings as townie on your radar.

That is, on DMG's radar, not Hoopla's.

[Fenchurch]

I don't consider a player sharing their town reads to be an indication that they are town. Do you?

[Fenchurch]

I thought the earlier stuff was crap, but since about #166 I think he has made good points, and was feeling conflicted in my vote on him. I'll re-read, but right now I think these are the strongest cases in the game.

[Fenchurch]

Hang on. I think I misinterpreted Empking's original post - it looks like you're saying that

I've

made no town tells myself

This is what I took it to mean. This is how I feel as well. Like you earlier, mine is currently a gut read. I'll have to re-read before I can expand properly.

[Fenchurch]

^ quote tag fail, that was just Hoopla.

[Fenchurch]

Yes. That is pretty much what it hinges on for me.

Although I haven't re-read yet, so there could be something I've missed. And it could just be because I've seen you play a strong scum-game, so my meter is adjusted.

Ald: you haven't voted for most of the game. Who is your top suspect now and why?

[Fenchurch]

The Hoopla case is very silly without any scum tells to back it up. The argument is that Hoopla is scum because she hasn't given off any town tells. But I can make the same argument in reverse: Hoopla is town because she hasn't given off any scum tells.

Sure, in a vacuum. But when other players have made town tells (ie. things that you don't think they would have said or thought of if they were scum), and we know that someone IS scum, then that is most likely to be the player who hasn't.

[Fenchurch]

I'm afraid I don't, but you could try posting in the Open Queue, a lot of people seem to put their replacement requests there these days, as well as the official replacement thread.

[Fenchurch]

I think... I'm up for lynching CA instead of replacing him. The posts he has made in the game didn't seem especially townie, and add to that the fact that he's ditched this game in particular, means he's either bored by it, or doesn't want to put in the work to defend himself, which I see as a mild scumtell. The usual danger of lynching in absentia is that they could be a power role, but I think the chances of that are low in this case. He was high enough on my scum list anyway.

VOTE: ConfidAnon

[Fenchurch]

I'll retract my vote, but not my sucky post.

UNVOTE:

I still believe, whereas flaking from the whole site is neutral (and cancels out 'lurking'), choosing to abandon one game is a scummy move.

[Fenchurch]

I don't think you can really say that without knowing the alignment of the other games he didn't flake from. Kind of strange to continue posting on site but completely ignore and not even acknowledge why you're leaving.

I agree that it's strange. But I don't think the two possible explanations I gave are that far-fetched. If someone chooses to abandon a game, surely there's a good chance it's because they see it as unwinnable, unfun, or both.

CA picked up a some votes and pressure pretty quickly in the game, and my experience is it takes more effort to defend yourself when the points against you are true.

If he has a better reason for leaving, then I'd have expected him to post to explain.

Ugh I don't know. I guess your argument is, why didn't he just make up a lie as to why he was leaving. And my only answer is that it's extra work to create a lie. I don't know.

[Fenchurch]

Halfway through.

DMG: Have you played with Hoopla before?

Hoopla: Did you know DMG was Emp before he made the slip-up?

[Fenchurch]

Yesyesyes.

I haven't finished up my readthrough, but I agree with what Hoopla is saying. I also now think she's less likely to be scum.

I think there is a good chance Alduskkel is sitting in a scum slot. I think he's played a very 'safe' and reserved game, which is somewhat scummy, and often the case when the other scumpartner is out there pushing cases more; which pretty much all other players have been doing. He's done little to make me think he's town.

VOTE: Alduskkel

[Fenchurch]

The deadline is less than 24 hours away. I really hope that there'll be some more posting before then, and I'd like to see a lynch on Ald, I do think he is the best pick today.

For the record, here are my other observations:
andrew - I know others have disagreed with me on this, but I do feel the early attacks on Hoopla (#36, #47) were more for

show

of scumhunting, to me they didn't feel genuine. I could be wrong, or as has been suggested, this could have been a pressure case, but that isn't how it comes across to me.

DMG - I feel that to a certain extent in the early game he was deliberately playing dumb, trying to get some newb-slack, to the point where Ald asked if he english was his first language. This doesn't seem like townie behaviour to me

CA/Fritz - I still think it should be considered as higher than average chance that this was an abandonment of scum under pressure, especially given the fact that he didn't even make a courtesy "replace me please" post; but I admit that other reasons may apply, most likely lack of interest.

Hoopla - Nothing helpful I can say; the last post seemed townie, but I know she's fooled me before.

Ald - Covered above. Has posted quite a lot, but is noncommittal, has stayed out of the limelight, and doesn't really seem to be 'scumhunting'.

[Fenchurch]

I think you're taking that out of context. It was a direct result of Alduskel misreading a quote and from that making him think I used a word incorrectly.

Possibly, I didn't realise that was why he was asking. But I still read your behaviour up to that point as "uncommunicative newbie", whether that was deliberate or not I don't know.

[Fenchurch]

Do people really flake because they are scum though?

Depends totally on the situation. It has been proven that flakers on the whole are, proportionately, no more likely to be town nor scum, so for the most part I would read nothing into it. But usually flakers flake from the site entirely, or if not, post to explain or apologise because they can't play in the game. It's unusual for someone not to do either, and I'm sure there are other possible reasons (privacy, forgetfulness, lack of time), but I'd say there is also a higher than normal chance that in this situation, it could have been due to scum under pressure.

[Fenchurch]

The most likely pairings in my opinion are:
Ald - andrew (not sure why some people are ruling andrew out, I think this is a bad move)
Ald - DMG
Hoopla - Fritz

But this isn't exhaustive as I haven't had time to go through all the possible options and put full consideration in. At any rate.. I'd be comfortable with either Ald or Fritz lynch today.

Sorry for lack of posts from me, I'm having a busy weekend.

Actually

BlakAdder, would it be appropriate to prod Ald before the deadline?

I've just realised he's absent atm and would rather he had the chance to claim before his lynch, ack.

[Fenchurch]

Also can I just say that I support with the process of looking at pairings, but not with choosing a lynch based on "probability" down to pairings, because I've read a number of games where town lost because of this. I think pairings are useful, but should then be judged on the actual players' actions and interactions; not how many times someone appears on the list.

[Fenchurch]

Jeez.. town are gonna hate me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Ald is scum actually.

UNVOTE:

But... I can't see through the fog and work out who IS. Panicky re-thinking going on okay.

[Fenchurch]

I'd prefer you to be the decider rather than Stef"Hoopla has heard of logic so must be town"unny.

Actually, if anyone is going to be the decider, I think it

should

be Stef"confirmed townie"unny.

Stef, if you do think Ald is scum, you still have the option to put him up in the lead. Actually I think he is still on the line for lynch at the mo, because he has held two votes for longer than Fritz has.

[Fenchurch]

Votechart for the game so far, for reference



Problem is there's been a lot more attacks and defences than just the votes. I feel like there's been enough info already to make the correct lynch, I just can't see the missing pieces yet.

[Fenchurch]

I'm not convinced Fritz is scum either. I don't want to save Ald; I want to make the right lynch. If I can work it out then I can give a case and others may change their votes before deadline.

And right now I trust Stef's judgment as much my own because I don't have a current judgment, and I know she's a townie.

[Fenchurch]

No, I've started to notice that she doesn't want to seem to be a part of any lynch that may happen.

Sorry.. it may be stupid, but I've made the mistake before of going through with a lynch despite having second thoughts at the last minute, and they've always turned out to be townies. I'd rather have a go at finding a better case if I can make it in time.

[Fenchurch]

I don't know, just a vibe from your post #308 that I've had before, before a mislynch, and regretted not acting upon it. Seemed honest and townie, not how scum would react. I don't really have a better explanation than that.

I'm re-reading, btw.

[Fenchurch]

Now, I believe if there is no move by deadline Ald is lynched because he had 3 votes first, however, the rules don't say so.

It's not in the rules but BlakAdder has stated that this is what he'd do, yes.

So Fenchurch, with your indecision, you could kill Ald.

I'm aware of this.

The problem is, my gut feeling is that Ald isn't scum. Whereas I do find Fritz pretty scummy, but then, it doesn't really add up for him to be scum, because everyone in the game has at some point pushed for his lynch, when they didn't have to (ie. at a point where it doesn't seem beneficial to bus). Except for Ald who took his vote off early in the game; but then, I don't believe Ald is scum.

Which leaves neither lynch to be a good one. So what do I do

[Fenchurch]

Woops, tried to update it because of the crossposting, I deleted it but it turned out I couldn't replace.

Here, I think this is up-to-date

[Fenchurch]

If I'm right that neither Ald nor Fritz are scum, then for me the likely combinations are:
Hoopla - andrew
andrew - DMG

Hoopla - DMG is harder to believe due to their attacks against each other.

Which makes andrew the best lynch imo.

However I'm still trying consider the options that include Fritz, because my gut feeling on him is pretty consistently scummy. Hoopla took her vote off early, but only after asking me and Stef if we wanted to hammer. andrew's been sitting on him the whole day. I'm still reading.

[Fenchurch]

Sorry, there is a lot to get through and it's late here. If I had a lot more time I think I could crack this but I don't so I will have to take a stab.

Stef, I'm not going to lynch Ald. Would you rather I vote Fritz, or switch to andrew? Ald, how do you feel about andrew?

[Fenchurch]

I no longer think the backup claiming was such a great move. As andrew points out, if scum aim for her and the doctor blocks, we're still in mylo; we've still got to pick 2 scum out of 5. So it's to the scum's benefit to aim for her regardless, either she dies, or she's a confirmed innocent but to no statistical gain for the town.

I also think backup claiming plan overstated the chance of a mislynch today. If we don't mislynch today, then it's not such a good plan, and there's a 2:7 chance more or less than we can lynch correctly.

I guess it has helped in that it's been a lot easier to look at pairings, with the ability to discount Stef. But nonetheless.. I don't think it was a foolproof townie plan.

-----------

My other thoughts...

If it's Fritz it pretty much relies on him being goon, there's no way andrew would bus to the extent this otherwise, nor probably Hoopla.

DMG and andrew have barely interacted as far as I can see, right now it's looking to me like they're the pair.

There's also a chance that all these are crackpot theories and I'm wasting time/giving scum a huge laugh. But I hope not!

[Fenchurch]

Ald, you're voting Fritz more or less out of necessity. But do you see him as scum? If so, how do you explain the lack of partners?

[Fenchurch]

if the confirmed townie was an otherwise scummy player then that would save us a mislynch

This works just as well if you ask for claims before you lynch.

And I think that the backup-claim can benefit scum as well, because in an open game, scum don't want to be trapped with confirm-able players; and counter claims can be tricky. The earlier they can eliminate PRs, the better.

fenchurch, you forgot to mention that the backup claiming today will rule out cc's the next day.p

So what, if it doesn't benefit the town in numbers then it doesn't matter whether it rules out counterclaims or not. And counterclaims are often not that hard to deal with. And you said earlier that you couldn't see any advantage to the town if Stef remains alive tomorrow and no one dies, so it is only beneficial if Stef lives in place of someone else, but I can't see why scum would allow that since it doesn't benefit them. So how does it benefit town?

I hold the view that its the ignoring and not the non-interacting that's the scum tell.

To put it another way, having read you both in iso, I see nothing here that I find unlikely as scum. My experience reading through completed games, is that scum rarely interact in a way that's surprising or unusual. I don't usually find scumtells, but I do find a lack of towntells. Having read through as many possibly pairings as I can in this game, I find other pairings don't fit together so well. The two of you are the most plausible as scum.

Look, I need to go to bed now. I still don't agree with lynching Ald, but I don't

know

, and I'm not keen on lynching Fritz either. I'm gonna put my vote where I think it belongs:

VOTE: andrew

If no one changes, then Ald will be lynched at deadline, so be it. If Stef, Fritz or Hoop removes their vote then Fritz will get lynched. If two people (Stef and Ald?) join me on andrew then he gets lynched. The choice is yours.

[Fenchurch]

Hooooooly... crap.

[Fenchurch]

Fritzler: Mafia Goon

at this I mean

Share the mafia qt please?

[Fenchurch]

Seriously guys, that's some nice bussing. I really felt I'd learned from this game; but I was damn near certain it was Emp-andrew, right up until the end.

Unofficial graveyard where I rambled on at length to Stef is here. Sorry I didn't invite andrew or Ald because there wasn't much left of the game at that point.

[Fenchurch]

I thought I'd have loads of after-game commentary, but I'm still reeling from the flip. And really annoyed I didn't just vote Fritz when I had the chance (but if I had, I doubt I'd ever have suspected andrew afterwards)

I did skim one of andrew's games a while ago for meta, and saw that he was capable of unorthodox/dastardly scum play, but I still thought the cross-bus here through day 1 and day 2 was so unlikely as to be not worth considering.

Massclaim: In the open game I modded, massclaim got suggested and supported by all the townies except one, making it obvious to the mafia who was the sole power role. Inevitably that player was killed night 1: all the negative effects of massclaim and none of the benefits. Massclaim didn't seem like such a bad move in our game, I felt neutral about it; but I didn't want the same outcome. It seemed clear pretty quickly that it was either me or Stef, and when Stef didn't't come out, I felt I should remain sitting on the fence to stop her from being exposed through PoE. I think this was a bad move on my part, I looked scummy for doing so, and I couldn't even tell whether it was even working to protect Stef's identity, so eventually I backed down. I wouldn't be surprised if this contributed to my eventual lynch. How did this passage of play look to everyone else?

Ald's claim: I found Ald's softclaim believable enough not to want to lynch him. To push for a hardclaim at that point seemed like it would have been dishonest and scummy - "I'm not interested in lynching you, but would you mind telling me if you're a PR anyway?" Then when Stef voted him, I was concerned because it seemed like Ald hadn't realised he was on the line for lynching even without a hammer vote, but it still didn't seem appropriate to

invite

him to claim, especially if I was mistaken and he was faking scum. Additionally, it was close to deadline, and there was a chance not everyone would check in before night to confirm the claim, so scum could still choose to counter him the next day if they wanted. So I did all I could think of: tried to make it clear that Ald was getting lynched, and look instead for a better lynch target. I was surprised when Hoopla interpreted that as me trying to stop him from claiming. Does my explanation now make sense? Would I have done better to ask Ald outright?

Of course I forgive my own lynch, and I'd appreciate any suggestions on what I could have done better. I honestly didn't see it coming, because if I was scum then surely the best play would have been for me to hide until deadline, and sit on the lynch of either Ald or Fritz?

BlakAdder: I think the game would have benefitted from bankable deadlines from the outset, with a few days added for the replacement. I prefer more constant activity which can come from an planned deadline, rather than the stall-flurry that comes from adding one later. Although the last day more-or-less made up for it Thanks for modding , and I enjoyed this choice of set-up. Any comments on how the game played out?

[Fenchurch]

Okay, so presumably you felt it still was better to softclaim than to claim outright? You put me in a difficult spot in post 319, where you asked why I changed my mind about lynching you, because how could I answer honestly without blowing your cover?

Also how did you explain me being scum when I was a position to get away with either remaining on your lynch (by pretending to be offline and leaving my vote there) or moving to Fritz (gain townie points for not lynching the PR).

[Fenchurch]

It seemed like the puzzle pieces fit, that your actions were all an attempt to stop me from claiming.

I guess it was odd, because yes, I did at that point think that a claim was probably anti-town, and assumed you did too since you chose not to make one, so it seemed odd for you then to agree with a case built on claiming being pro-town.

But I understand there were other reasons why you thought I was scum, and a fair amount of heat of the moment stuff, and I also made some snap judgements because of the deadline pressure. I think I could have got away with lurking if I had been scum, it was about 8 hours until deadline and many people have got away with being absent for longer than that.

Maybe, as a townie, I shouldn't have been so happy to accept the softclaim, and insisted that you make a proper claim before I lifted my vote. Although I'm still not convinced whether day 1 claims are good for town (I mean, if it is that pro-town, why didn't anyone suggest that the main PR claim a little earlier, before we were so close to deadline?). It seemed such a genuine softclaim and fitting with your play thus far that I felt safe in believing it, but perhaps I'm over-confident in my judgement of that, and opening myself to believing scum softclaims too.

[Fenchurch]

Hoops: if you'd seen the softclaim before me, is that what you'd have done? ^